Scientific method should take in as large a sample as possible to prove or disprove a theory. It should also take into consideration time. Observations can change with time. Since the earth's weather patterns and therefore temperatures are constantly changing, I see no practical way of proving or disproving the theory of global warming.
The cynic in me says that both sides are skewing the data to favour their case. > > > That noted leftist rag, Scientific American, summed up the evidence > in this arena last year. See my post on this: > > http://leafe.com/archives/showMsg/361836 > > ... and then read the evidence for yourself. If you base your > conclusions on any single study, or a very small group of studies, you > aren't being scientific. > > > -- Ed Leafe > > > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
